Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Omni\s+VI\s+plus\s+verses\s+the\s+Yaesu\s+FT1000\!\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Omni\s+VI\s+plus\s+verses\s+the\s+Yaesu\s+FT1000\!\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Omni VI plus verses the Yaesu FT1000! (score: 1): Author: jsjones@rbnet.com (Steve Jones); Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 02:14:33 -0400; I currently have the FT1000 Yaesu and hear from users of the Omni VI or plus how much better radio it is especially on the recieve end. I would love to get some objective feedback from FT1000 owners; /archives//html/TenTec/1997-05/msg00094.html (7,342 bytes)
2. [TenTec] Omni VI plus verses the Yaesu FT1000! (score: 1): Author: crobson@erie.net (Chris Robson); Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 06:04:46 -0400; Steve, Take Ten-Tec up on the 30 day test, if you like it(which I know my wife would kill me if I sold OUR Omni VI), I'm sure there are a bunch of guys wearing those stupid Yaesu hats willing to buy; /archives//html/TenTec/1997-05/msg00096.html (7,858 bytes)
3. [TenTec] Omni VI plus verses the Yaesu FT1000! (score: 1): Author: w.dillon@ic.ac.uk (Wayne Dillon); Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 11:36:59; Steve and Chris, FT1000 and FT1000MP (they are completely different beasts!) are good rigs (Chris, I don't think I'd go as far as to say "great" rigs),but, they still can't hold a candle to the Ten T; /archives//html/TenTec/1997-05/msg00097.html (9,450 bytes)
4. [TenTec] Omni VI plus verses the Yaesu FT1000! (score: 1): Author: ad4yh@nortel.ca (Dale Pendleton); Date: 21 May 1997 15:09 EDT; Way ta go dere Chris. Ya tellem en ya tellem gud. Cuden't agree more...dale -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm Submissions: tentec@contesting.com Administrative requests: tentec-; /archives//html/TenTec/1997-05/msg00106.html (8,270 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]